Scion tC Forums banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Great information! Thanks for posting. Looking forward to seeing the side impact tests with the curtain air bags and without.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Sweet!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,694 Posts
Labfish - look what color tC they used for the picture on the Crash Test resutls page. Next time buy a black one
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
ahem... i have a silver one !!! that is silver right? damn work moniters and their crappy color
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,694 Posts
It's Azure Pearl, just like Labfish's (RIP) tC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
ah i see... stupid work monitors... then again that pic is really fuzzy to me... at least on this monitor @ work
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,852 Posts
Originally posted by zoltiz@Oct 27 2004, 06:21 AM
Labfish - look what color tC they used for the picture on the Crash Test resutls page. Next time buy a black one
Yeah, tell me about it. That almost could have been a direct representation of ME in that video if I hadn't managed to straighten my wheel when I looked up at the last second to see huge SUV going fast in my rear view mirror. I actually would have been propelled into oncoming traffic at about...oh...20 mph or so, give or take a few physics lessons and whether I kept my foot on the brake or not....and had a ping-pong ball effect with two lanes of 40-45 mph traffic.

Then you would have seen some REAL impressive pictures. LoL...once I got out of the hospital, most likely. Just because it's a 5 star rating for that impact doesn't mean you'd be loving yourself after it.

And I've got the next car color figured out...LoL...hell if they can't see me in a light blue car...I went to the Flint Mica...maybe it shows up better. Who knows.

And for those who haven't seen the pictures of my dead azure pearl...it's somewhere around here.
OH ya... in this same thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
you're welcome to all for the post
just had to share that..

and shall we have a moment of silence for Labfish's dearly departed Azure pearl?
*silence*

glad you're okay though..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
I was looking at the results of the crash test, but I don't understand what these numbers mean?

Head Injury Criterion 283 438
Chest Deceleration (g's) 40 49
Femur Load l/r1 (lbs) 375/1009 666/273

Does anyone know? Whats with the 666??????????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Originally posted by sitdowncomic@Oct 27 2004, 04:47 PM
I was looking at the results of the crash test, but I don't understand what these numbers mean?

Head Injury Criterion 283 438
Chest Deceleration (g's) 40 49
Femur Load l/r1 (lbs) 375/1009 666/273

Does anyone know? Whats with the 666??????????
the head injury criterion, lower the better.. i am not sure what units they are in. it means how the head was snapped around on the crash dummy.

the chest deceleration is in G's.. or how many forces of gravity.. 1G = 14.8 lbs/square inch. So sitting here you're used to 1 Unit of Gravity. astronauts feel 5-6G's taking off in the space shuttle. So your chest would experience 40G's against the shoulder seat belt if you were sitting in the driver's seat.. the passenger seat person would experience 49G's..

40G's X 14.8 lbs/sq in = 592lbs of force on your chest.

so chances are you would probably be a little bruised on your chest. not sure if that would break a rib.. i know that the civic is higher and i had an accident with a 1991 CRX Si.. and i was a little sore for a day or two after having a head on collision with that car..

- Femur load. the femur is your leg bone. The crash dummy experienced this level of load on it's legs..

so the first numbers 375 and 1009.. are what the driver dummy felt on it's left and right legs.. chances are that might mean a broken food on the right foot.. these are in lbs of force.. so imagine 1009 lbs coming onto your leg (femur) in a matter of seconds? ouch..

the 2nd numbers 666 and 273 lbs is for the passenger femurs.. yeah 666.. just happened to be the number the dummy experience.. shall we play the spooky music now? lol

hope this is making sense of what I'm writing.. this is the scary part.. there are cars that are MUCH higher in force numbers that the tC!! like the cavalier (deadly).. or other cars.. these numbers are actually BELOW the numbers for my old 96 Civic.. scary eh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
^^^ Hmm... I wonder why there is such a difference between the driver's right and left leg. Could it be the airbag?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
Nice job sciontc_mich for spelling it all out.

I don't like those numbers one bit! I can't believe our government even allows car manufactures to start selling, when they haven't even crash tested them. Toyota should know that young kids are going to be buying these cars. And what do young kids do? Drive fast..... And they give us these numbers soooo disappointing.

ONLY **** (four stars) for the pasenger? This is 2005, and they cant get a ***** (five star) safety rating?

And whats with no side crash tests????? STUPID!!!!

done venting, thank you for your time...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
427 Posts
(my first post at this site)
I'm in waiting... I've got a flint mica showing up at the dealership this weekend. That being the case, i've been researching tC's like crazy!

This was a piece of information I did not yet have. Thanks so much for posting the link.

There were a few things I found interesting about the results. First, they are quite good for a 'small car'. Second requires a bit of backstory. I purchased a 1997 Camry in '97 for my wife since they were the safest car on the road according to the nhtsa tests. It appears that the standards have gone up since then:
My Camry: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/Cars/185.html

NHTSA says you should only compare cars of equal weight (+/- 250lbs). That said, I noticed that the Camry is 3107 lbs and their weight of the tC is 2904. Only 203 lbs different. Well, that makes it a valid comparison between the two. Based on the documented tests, that means that the tC is SAFER than my wifes Camry in the frontal tests. While the side impact tests are not in yet, I'm willing to bet the results will be similar. Needless to say, my anticipation is building and I can't wait to get out of my '91 Integra (NHTSA doesn't have test for my 2dr, but the 4dr tests weren't that great).

Awesome site and I hope to yap at ya'll some more.

krzy

btw: to find other cars, go here: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/index.cfm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,242 Posts
Originally posted by sitdowncomic@Oct 27 2004, 04:23 PM
Nice job sciontc_mich for spelling it all out.

I don't like those numbers one bit! I can't believe our government even allows car manufactures to start selling, when they haven't even crash tested them. Toyota should know that young kids are going to be buying these cars. And what do young kids do? Drive fast..... And they give us these numbers soooo disappointing.

ONLY **** (four stars) for the pasenger? This is 2005, and they cant get a ***** (five star) safety rating?

And whats with no side crash tests????? STUPID!!!!

done venting, thank you for your time...
Wow...Welcome to the real world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
id like to see a car that got less then 4 stars. anyone seen one?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
blazers have like one or two stars.....POS!!! all blazers have the lowest rating in rollover tests, even lower than explorers!
i know this bc i almost bought one last year and bc of the rollover rating, i changed my mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
264 Posts
Hey cool, I drive a 91 teggy too! Oh and about the femur, I think its the longest bone in your body, the one from your hip to your knee, so I don't really know about your foot being broken, unless it got caught up in the pedals or was impacted down there but the femur load would likely result in a broken leg rather than foot.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top